Indians would not make good slaves because it’s their country and they can flee into the wilderness which they can survive in or they can join another indian tribe. Blacks were foreigners and would die if they tried to escape. Also they did not have genetic immunity to diseases like smallpox let alone tropical diseases like malaria which blacks did.
Emperical Study: 1 in 1000 black men killed by Police, 1 in 2000 for whites
- Thread starter Abdalla
- Start date
No surprise, and any Somali who thinks these cadaan cops will spare you because of your pointy noise HA
You guys are just in danger as other blacks.
Cop: freeze motherfukker
Geeljire:
wait cotdamn it, look at my narrow noseYou dont need guns to choke The masters wife
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Apollo
VIP
I don't know how they kept them in check, but somehow they did.. I still don't think it says anything about a docile nature in blacks.
East Asians seem to be the most docile/meek to me.
Why?
Apollo
VIP
Basing it on personal experience.
New World Blacks are definitely not docile, personality-wise.
The alchemist
VIP
I'm specifically talking about the U.S. The criminal justice system there helps perpetuate this uneven socio-economic condition for minorities.
I think it’s just culture. East Asian people have been ruled by massive centralised imperial powers for thousands of years so their culture teaches obedience and hard work.Basing it on personal experience.
New World Blacks are definitely not docile, personality-wise.
Btw in regards to that so called warrior gene, whilst AAs have it at 58 %, Maori and Chinese males have it at 56 %, and Taiwanese males have it at 61 %. I think it’s just pseudo science, like how people have so called gambling genes, alcoholic genes etc that are obviously fake.
Apollo
VIP
Possible..
It's the 2-repeat MAO-A allele that is significantly over-represented in Africans while very low in Eurasians. East Asians also have less serum testosterone levels than Africans.
The 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene confers an increased risk for shooting and stabbing behaviors.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24326626
The association between the MAOA 2R genotype and delinquency over time among men: the interactive role of parental closeness and parental incarceration
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5640317/
Etc
Blacks commit disproportionately more crime so they have disproportionately more negative interactions with police and that will end up with more deaths by police shootings.
Simple statistics.
I think you're confusing heritability with very few well known genes. There could be hundreds of genes working complementary to eachother to cause these traits or one theoretically.
Almost everything is somewhat heritable including political beliefs
The first part makes sense.
I don't get your last point. Red Indians were native, so they should have the genetic immunity of the domestic diseases unlike blacks
This is standardised. Standardisation takes away disproportionality. Secondly, this is based on people that come in contact with police.
You said
Study: Black Men Face Death by Police 1 in 1,000 Times, White Counterparts Comparatively Killed by Officers 1 in 2,000 Times
So they're twice as likely to be killed right? This is just a simple stat.
This is explained by the fact blacks are 13% of the population but consistently commit 36% of the violent crimes in the US. If you want to be specific, correcting for the crime rates blacks are less likely to be shot by police than whites, because had whites committed as a disproportionate number of crimes they would have more interactions with police that will increase the number of shootings.
True but malaria was introduced to the Americas post Columbus. And Indians did not have resistance to malaria whilst Africans did.
The diseases like smallpox brought to the americas were not domestic but were from the old world, as the americas were isolated for over ten thousand years and they did not have any domestic animals like goats, cows, horses, sheep, they did not develop immunity to diseases that the old world did. So over 90 % of the Indians died after contact with European traders.
Yes we did and we proud of that part of our history
I understand what you wanna to say but your numerical reasoning is wrong. This this is standardised to 1000 population. Therefore them making up 16% of the population or 36% of crime rates shouldn't be a numerical issue, since it's already standardised and corrected for the disproportionality.
Even if you take the disportional representation into account, they only make 36% of the crimes but are twice as likely to be killed compares to the other 64% of the offenders. That in itself is disproportionate as well.
But that should be not an issue.
A lot of shit is heritable by the way.
We all accept the physical traits that aren't politically incorrect. We accept skin colour is heritable even though there are environmental factors. We accept height is 80% heritable in adults eventhough the environment plays a role. We accept SNP mutations such as sickle cell anemia are not heritable are related to certain races. We accept the differences in bone density between the races and that is heritable eventhough environment plays a role. We accept differences in everything EXCEPT the brain, a physical organ.
Now I know that we don't know the genes that directly increase IQ although a few hundred genes have been identified as very predictive. Funnily enough when race isn't mentioned its accepted IQ is 80% heritable but as soon as you mention different demographic groups ie races there's a complete denial of it.
Political views are heritable too although we haven't narrowed down the exact genes. It doesn't need to be narrowed down.
All of this is accepted in the scientific community but no one wants to admit it when race is mentioned.
We all accept the physical traits that aren't politically incorrect. We accept skin colour is heritable even though there are environmental factors. We accept height is 80% heritable in adults eventhough the environment plays a role. We accept SNP mutations such as sickle cell anemia are not heritable are related to certain races. We accept the differences in bone density between the races and that is heritable eventhough environment plays a role. We accept differences in everything EXCEPT the brain, a physical organ.
Now I know that we don't know the genes that directly increase IQ although a few hundred genes have been identified as very predictive. Funnily enough when race isn't mentioned its accepted IQ is 80% heritable but as soon as you mention different demographic groups ie races there's a complete denial of it.
Political views are heritable too although we haven't narrowed down the exact genes. It doesn't need to be narrowed down.
All of this is accepted in the scientific community but no one wants to admit it when race is mentioned.
You mention it's standardised then ignore it in the second paragraph.
Let's make a hypothetical scenario to make it simple.
Polce stop 100 blacks and 100 whites.
Let's say 25 blacks commit crime but 75 whites commit crime.
So proportionally more whites commit crime. These whites will be more likely to get shot by the police because they have disproportionately more criminals. So even thought all 100 get stopped on each race, whites are more likely to do something criminal and get shot by police as a coincidence.
Let's say whites are twice as likely to get shot. Then for a group that commits disproportionately more crime they get shot disproportionate less often than the blacks who commit less crimes on average.
Trending
-
-
-
BREAKING NEWS US and China reach deal to transfer TikTok ownership, trade- Started by Sigmundd
- Replies: 38